Congressional candidate shoots down drone with hunting rifle in new ad

Yahoo ^ | April 15, 2014 | Eric Pfeiffer

[kingattax]

VIDEO AT LINK

Montana congressional candidate Matt Rosendale swears he doesn’t have a problem with drones.

“I actually consider myself to be very supportive of technology,” Rosendale told Yahoo News in an interview on Tuesday.

Still, the question had to be asked after Rosendale on Monday released a new campaign ad in which he used a hunting rifle to shoot down a drone.

The ad opens with an overhead camera angle, with the drone menacingly hovering over the state senator.

“I’m Matt Rosendale and this is how I'd look from a government drone,” the candidate says as he’s framed dead to rights in a digital set of crosshairs.

“And this is what I think about it,” Rosendale says as the camera cuts to him cocking and firing a rifle. The camera switches back to the drone pilot’s point of view, with text reading “SIGNAL LOST,” after the simulated gunshot impact shatters the drone’s lens.

[Paladin2]

LOL here too.

Montana is a big place but could use some Drone Hunting Licenses like those guys in Colo. tried to set up.

[Paladin2]

Mont. used to have 2 Congressional Districts.

Apparently not enough Californians have moved out there yet....

[MarMema]

I LOVE this. This is excellent.

So heartwarming to see people like this.

[Ray76]

A true American.

[Jacquerie]

And with only one vote in the House of Reps, Montana's vote at a convention of the states to propose amendments would cancel the vote of California, which has fifty-three congressmen. Heh, heh.

[skinkinthegrass]

PULL! :-)

[jsanders2001]

Yeah. Drones make for great skeet shooting. If they put guns on them we’ll need to come up EMP guns to fry their electronics first though...: )

[skinkinthegrass]

think "enhanced" maser; propagate/aim the
beam right @ the beast/gnat (ZOT! :) or just created
alot of high tetrawave interference!

[jsanders2001]

> think “enhanced” maser; propagate/aim the
beam right @ the beast/gnat (ZOT! :) or just created
alot of high tetrawave interference!

Needs to be developed to deal with them once they go weaponized in your area which they will. We need to stop paying DC so much that they can create technology like this to be used against citizenry. That and automated traffic ticketing devices like red light and speeding cameras that are used to extort even more from us.

[from occupied ga]

Yeah. Drones make for great skeet shooting

Only if you can hit a clay pigeon from a mile away.

[jsanders2001]

> Yeah. Drones make for great skeet shooting. Only if you can hit a clay pigeon from a mile away.

I’m sure they’ll come in a little closer than that especially if they have mounted guns...: )

[from occupied ga]

I’m sure they’ll come in a little closer than that especially if they have mounted guns

Kind of depends on what. It wouldn't even have to be within a mile to launch a missile, and the armament they carry is not the sort you need to be close to use.

[from occupied ga]

FYI the hellfire missile has a maximum effective range of 5 miles and a minimum range of 1500 feet. Even at the closest range, 1500 feet (500 yards), you'd be hard pressed to hit a target moving at 170 miles per hour (drone cruising speed.) I know I couldn't.

[jsanders2001]

I don’t think you could stop (hellfire missile) it with conventional non-military weapons but then again I’m no expert in that field. My specialty is intel...)

[from occupied ga]

I don’t think you could stop (hellfire missile) it with conventional non-military weapons

Not talking about the missile, but rather the drone launch platform. Stand off keeps it out of range for most defensive weaponry. The major vulnerability would be the operators if you could find them and if you could get to them. They'd probably be on a well guarded military base someplace 1000 or more miles from the target.

[Mycroft Holmes]

I don’t think you could stop (hellfire missile) it with conventional non-military weapons...

---

All things that fly are fragile, else they don't fly. Typical parts are 1.5 times as strong as they need to be for normal operation. If you can hit it you can break it. The problem is hitting it. Cue Laz here...

Fight the Free Sh☭t Nation

[tacticalogic]

They'd probably be on a well guarded military base someplace 1000 or more miles from the target.

The operator might be, but they have to take off and land from somewhere within their fuel range.

[grobdriver]

Of course you all know that Yahoo! put this ad up on their site to scare the living daylights out of you, the watcher.
And not because of the drone - but because of the scary man with the rifle.

You're now supposed to run screaming to your congressman demanding "Gun Safety" laws so that scary man with his scary rifle is put in jail.

The drone? They watch out for you and keep you safe from the world's maniacs. Embrace them.

[jsanders2001]

I don’t think you could stop (hellfire missile) it with conventional non-military weapons
Not talking about the missile, but rather the drone launch platform. Stand off keeps it out of range for most defensive weaponry. The major vulnerability would be the operators if you could find them and if you could get to them. They’d probably be on a well guarded military base someplace 1000 or more miles from the target.

Just to make it clear to NSA, this discussion is just 2 armchair quarterbacks discussing how we would “defend” ourselves if your “buddies” were trying o kill us without justifiable reason,,,: )